About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
him before he receives miranda warning is the right thing to do. a short time ago, the aclu put out a statement saying every defendant is entitled to defend miranda lights. five lawmakers want him treated as an enemy combatant. 53 people remain in boston hospitals today, three in critical condition, including a 7-year-old girl. nbc news national investigative correspondent michaels i cough is in boston, ron allen outside boston's beth israel medical center where the suspect and many of the victims are being kept and kristen we willinger at the white house, let's get to the latest on investigation. for that, we turn to michaels i cough, again, in boston. what is the fbi focusing on today and moving forward? >> reporter: federal prosecutors are focusing on drafting a criminal complaint we could see as early as this afternoon, detailing the criminal charges against him supported by an affidavit from an fbi agent that would lay out some details of the plot. not all of them but could provide crucial new information for us about what tsarnaev actually did and raise and shed some light on
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
of public safety exception before you give him his miranda rights, all that talk of naming him as an enemy combatant, all of that is moot right now. they've gone forward with the official proceedings. >> well, they may have used the public safety exception, and apparently they were using it to question him, and he responded in some way given his medical condition. but certainly now that he has a lawyer, that period, however long it was, is over. and you're right, the enemy combatant thing was a nonstarter from the never going to happen. this is a criminal case in federal court in massachusetts, and that's where it will stay until it's resolved one way or another. >> it's going to take a while. thanks very much, jeffrey. much more on what's going on in this boston investigation coming up here in "the situation room" 0. >>> also, another terror plot released today, new information. canadian authorities announcing the arrest of two men believed to be part of a terror plot to attack a passenger train that may have been heading towards the united states, the plot said to have an alleged connect
's before he gets the miranda rights. the fact that he can't speak right now, does that push back that window of time because they're not getting anything from him? >> that's a good question that i won't speculate on without a legal background. i'll leave that one up to the master pete williams. but i can imagine there's got to be some sort of gray area there that some lawyer could look at. on that point, though, i think it's interesting, where we've gone now from, alex, is we've gone from this, all right, what exactly happened, to these real sort of questions surrounding the national security of this country, and how exactly these two individuals were able to go forward with what they ultimately accomplished. so this morning, sort of around that point, talking to folks related to the house homeland security committee, they say they really want to sort of get this investigation rolling on why these two individuals seem to have slipped through the u.s. intelligence community, especially after that information reported yesterday that the russians were concerned about the older broth
, let me come over to you, a lot of talk about miranda. but give me a sense of what the leeway is especially in situations like this, after acts like what happened here at the marathon. >> well, it is yesterday's news. he's been given his miranda warnings and probably anything he said without his miranda warnings is not going to be needed by the government or the prosecution. remember, they did not indict him as a terrorist, that's very important. they indicted him as an ordinary murderer, anybody who wants to kill their mother-in-law, business partner and makes an improvised explosive device and kills them is just as guilty under the statute indicted as osama bin laden might be. this is not a terrorist prosecution. they don't have to prove intent to terrorize, intent to intimidate. they can prove their case just through the videotapes. now, i predict there are going to be two types of possible defenses in this case. number one, the jihad defense. i did it, i'm proud, i'm happy, please kill me, i want to join my brother in paradise. i'm a martyr. the other, my brother made me d
was given his miranda rights? >> we don't know as of yet. he has been read his miranda rights. but we don't know if this information came before or after. as you know there was a public safety exemption before he was read his miranda rights. so there was time when law enforcement had the opportunity to talk to him before he had quote/unquote lawyered up. but we don't know yet whether or not this information came before he said he understood his rights, or after. >> all right, jake tapper, terrific reporting. great to have you here this morning. >> thanks, john. >> don't miss "the lead" every day at 4:00. we're also learning more this morning about -- we're learning more this morning about criminal complaints against tsarnaev detailing step by step how the deadly attack on the boston marathon unfolded. our coverage continues this morning with miguel marquez outside best israel deaconess medical center right here in boston. good morning, miguel. >> good morning, john. this is the criminal complaint that contains what we expect are the first charges. we'll see many more against mr. tsarnaev.
but say they were not in contact with overseas terror groups. he was read his miranda rights during an initial court appearance from the hospital that gives the suspect access to a lawyer. and means he will not be tried as an enemy combatant. described as a possible gun shot wound to the hand, the 19-year-old has been described as cooperative during questioning, forced to write his answers or nod yes or no. he told investigators that he and his brother came up with the attacks on their own finding internet resources to learn how to make bombs. he's been assigned three public defenders and could very well face the death penalty. a weekend search of dzhokhar's dorm room turned up a black jacket and white hat, similar to the surveillance photos. investigators also want to question tsarnaev's wife. she later converted to islam, dropped out of college and had a child with him. her attorney has said she had no suspicions that her husband might be plotting an attack. meanwhile, hundreds of people stood in silence at 2:50 p.m. one week after the bombings. president obama marked the moment o
. just to confirm, this -- dzhokhar tsarnaev has not yet been read his miranda rights, correct? >> i have to say i don't know. because there was an initial appearance today, that's why this complaint is out. the circuit executive, the administrator of this area, has put out a statement saying there was an initial appearance before a magistrate judge. that is as far as i understand it an arraignment. i have never heard of an arraignment without an attorney present. they didn't mention an attorney present. if an attorney is present, the attorney will simply say to the client, you -- don't answer questions. at that point, the attorney is the person the prosecutor is supposed to deal with. i have to say, there is information out there that we don't have. whether an attorney was present, whether this was an actual arraignment, i think we just need to hold off on that until we get more information. >> we're holding off. still so early this all happened. >> before we let deb feyerick go and chase down that lead she was referring to, deb, i was wondering, is there anything else that stands out in
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8